Cooperative Extension Service

West Lafayette, IN 47907

Protecting Prime Farmland in Indiana

Interest in the protection of Indiana's prime agricultural land is
growing. At the community level, this interest is often spurred by
urban sprawl into rural areas, which can bring into conflict the goals
of farm and non-farm neighbors. At county and multi-county levels,
planning organizations are having to deal with the farmland
preservation issue as they formulate comprehensive area plans for
future orderly land development. And at the state level, the General
Assembly already has made an in-depth study and is fashioning what it
hopes will be meaningful policy.

Just what is prime farmland? How is it determined? How much has
already been lost, and how much do we have left? What are the
consequences of continued loss locally, statewide and nationally? And
what kind of influence can the average person have in farmland
protection decisions? This publication seeks to answer these and
similar questions in the belief that the best decisions come from the
input of an informed citizenry.

WHAT IS "PRIME FARMLAND"?

Since passage of the Rural Development Act in 1972, the
U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
been working to determine the types and amount of prime agricultural
land in the United States. The definition of prime agricultural land
has changed somewhat over time; the one currently being used by the
NRCS is as follows:

Prime farmland is that land best suited for producing food, feed,
forage, fiber and oilseed crops, and also available for these
uses. (In other words, the land could be crop, pasture, range, forest
or other land, but not built-up land or water.) It has the soil
quality, growing season and moisture supply needed to produce
sustained yields of crops economically if treated and managed
according to modern farming methods.

WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIME FARMLAND?

The Natural Resources Conservation Service evaluates and classifies soil mapping
units (areas of soil delineated on detailed county soil survey maps)
as "prime" or "not prime" farmland based on characteristics that favor
economic crop production. Nationally, eight uniformly applied
minimum criteria must be met for a soil mapping unit to qualify as
"prime".

National criteria. All prime agricultural lands possess the
following characteristics:

* The soils have an adequate moisture supply (from either natural
rainfall or irrigation) and good water storage capacity.

* Mean annual soil temperature and length of growing season are
within the ranges required for high crop yields.

* The subsoils are finer in texture than sandy loam (which also
reflects water-holding capacity).

* The land has less than 6 percent slope (which reflects the
erosion hazard).

* The land is not subject to frequent flooding during any season
of the year.

HOW MUCH PRIME FARMLAND DOES INDIANA HAVE, AND WHERE IS IT?

By the above definition, much of our land in Indiana would be
classified as prime farmland. Because the classification process is
still going on, it is not known at this point how much prime farmland
there is. We do know that, of the state's 23 million total acres, 15.5
million is reported as farmland; and of that, 13 million is
cropland. Of the cropland, 11.5 million acres is estimated as "prime".
There is also another 2.5 million acres of prime land that is in
pasture or forest use. In the northern two-thirds of Indiana, most
urban areas are surrounded by land that is at least 75 percent
"prime".

The Indiana soil survey staff (involving Scientists of the Natural Resource
Conservation Service, the Indiana Department of Natural Resources and
Agricultural Research Programs at Purdue University) has
developed a state map showing the general prime farmland areas. They
have also completed some of the more detailed county-level maps. The
newer county soil survey reports also list those mapping units that
are considered to be "prime". Check with your local NRCS office to see
if a prime farmland map is available for your county or if your county
soil survey report lists prime farmland mapping units.

HOW MUCH FARMLAND HAS INDIANA AND THE U.S. LOST OVER THE YEARS?

From 1940 to 1974, Indiana farmland declined by 3,015,600 acres,
48 percent of which was cropland. The NRCS currently estimates that
conversion of rural land to urban uses in the state is proceeding at
a rate of 85,000 acres per year.

Nationally, total farm acreage dropped from a high of 1,161 million
in 1950 to 1,017 million in 1974 (a 12.4 percent loss). In that
period, cropland declined 27 million acres, from 409 million to 382
million (a 6.6 percent loss). Importantly, over one-fourth of that
cropland acreage loss was recorded in the five-state region of
Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin, which all have a
high percentage of prime farmland.

WHY SHOULD WE BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE LOSS OF GOOD FARMLAND?

The United States is not going to run out of land to feed itself
within the foreseeable future; thus, reasons for preserving prime
agricultural land are difficult to express just in terms of domestic
food needs. But other considerations related to present and future
requirements for prime land make its continued, unchecked loss a
matter of grave concern. Here are some reasons why:

1.Food is produced on prime farmland more efficiently and with less
soil erosion, resulting in less pollution from sediment, nutrients and
pesticides. When prime land is lost, it not only takes more
non-prime land to produce the same amount of food, but also results in
lower returns per unit of production input. This means either higher
domestic prices or less product to export.

To illustrate, there are about 66 million acres of what could be
termed prime corn-growing land in the U.S. Studies of corn production
trends show that, without improved technology, for every million acres
planted to corn above that 66 million, average yield drops
approximately 1/2 bushel per acre. So, while there are other acres on
which to grow corn, they are obviously not equivalent to prime corn
land.

This indicates that our nation's agricultural land base, although
large, cannot be expanded much beyond current levels without
sacrificing efficiency. And although some acreage could be converted
to row crops, the result is lower per-acre production at a higher cost
plus loss of that land's present output (such as lumber from woodland
or cattle from pastureland).

2.The United States is a food-exporting country. Loss of prime
farmland, as mentioned above, eventually reduces our export potential
or forces into production land previously considered marginal. Much
of this marginal land should remain in forage or forestry production
to prevent the land resource from being damaged. However, increased
pressure to export high-value foodstuffs to balance payments for
imports from other countries may cause us to use such land unwisely
from an agronomic standpoint.

3.Loss of agricultural land to urban development, by and large,
is irreversible. The inflexibility of much urban land use makes it
impractical, if not impossible, to bring such land back into
production again. This is not the case when cropland is diverted to
forestry, forage production or recreation uses. Such acreage can be
returned to intensive grain production, if needed.

WHAT PROBLEMS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH FARMLAND CONVERSION AT THE COMMUNITY
LEVEL?

Loss of prime farmland to urban sprawl is not only costly in terms
of land resources, but can also be an inefficient way for a community
to grow. Too often in Indiana, growth has been by "leap frog" and
"strip" development. (The term leap frog refers to development of land
outside the urban limits but not adjoining it; whereas, strip
development refers to growth on lots of varying sizes along rural
roads near the urban area.) Both forms of development are usually
characterized by relatively few home-sites on relatively large
amounts of land.

These types of urban sprawl can produce severe growing pains for
communities-both economic and social. For instance, public utilities
for the new area may be nonexistent or stretched to the breaking
point, creating water supply and waste disposal problems. And many
Indiana soils which were prime for corn and soybeans are poor for
septic systems. As a rural area becomes more developed, the police,
fire and emergency services that were adequate for a few farm
families, now have to keep pace with a population ten or a hundred
times as large. And the country roads that used to serve a handful of
people are unsuitable for commuter traffic. Of course, all these
public facility and service improvements must be paid for by the
community.

On the social side, urban encroachment can bring into conflict farm
and non-farm groups whose goals and aspirations are decidedly
different. To the agricultural producer who is trying to grow as much
food as cheaply as possible, farming means dust, livestock odors,
chemical spraying and late-night field activity. To the transplanted
urbanite seeking the peace and quiet of country living, these
characteristics of modern farming are not at all appreciated. In some
states, nuisance laws regulating agriculture beyond strictly health
and safety concerns have created tremendous difficulties for farmers
in rapidly urbanizing areas, even putting some out of business. In
this atmosphere of tension, other conflicting issues are often
"settled" according to which side has the most votes, rather than
reasoning together.

WHAT ARE SOME REASONS FOR PRESERVING PRIME FARMLAND AS FAR AS
NATIONAL WELFARE IS CONCERNED?

While the "experts" may differ somewhat as to the world's ability
to feed itself in the years ahead, most would agree that continued
loss of highly productive agricultural land is undesirable. Here are
some strong arguments for preserving land as a contingency against
possible difficulties that may develop in food production.

1. Availability of energy will continue to be a problem in the
future. If increasing amounts of energy are to come from biomass
harvested off the land, then the nearly level, non-erosive prime lands
will support intensive production of biomass far better than rolling
lands. Prime agricultural land can produce both food and biomass for
energy in the cheapest, most efficient manner.

2. A number of scientists feel that the earth's climate may be
changing to a cooler, shorter season, particularly in the Corn
Belt. If this is correct, then steps must be taken in this generation
to insure that future generations have sufficient opportunity to grow
food. Preserving those lands having maximum production potential under
less-than-optimum growing conditions is a hedge on the side of
safety. Hoped-for breakthroughs in the growing or manufacture of food
may negate the need for preserving agricultural land. But can we take
that chance for future generations?

3. Many developing countries already depend on food-surplus nations
like the United States for their survival. Despite attempts to
increase food production in those countries, this dependency will not
lessen, at least not in the near future. Thus, loss of productivity
due to conversion of our prime agricultural land to other uses could
not only affect world food supply stability, but also markedly
influence availability and price of domestic supplies.

4. If the U.S. is to maintain a diversified economy, agriculture
should be an important part of that economy. Diversification tends to
level out some of the peaks and valleys within a particular industry
and helps maintain a greater overall measure of prosperity. By the
same token, because of the interrelationships that exist among
segments of the economy, if a particular industry like agriculture is
curtailed, the various service industries associated with it are
also affected. No input component is more important to the viability
of agriculture's contribution to U.S. economic strength than the
productive soils resource; thus the importance of preventing its loss.

WHAT HAVE GOVERNMENTAL UNITS DONE TO PROTECT AGRICULTURAL LAND?

Government policy at federal, state and local levels can greatly
affect what happens to agricultural land. One key finding of the 1
980 National Agriculture Land Study was that many federal programs
were responsible for irreversible loss of agricultural land by
encouraging conversion to non-farm uses. This, among other things, led
Congress to pass the Farmland Protection Act of 1981, which seeks to
decrease the loss of farm and resulting from federal programs. Prior
to passage of this Act, only two agencies--the USDA and USEPA--had
policies requiring consideration of their programs' impacts on
agricultural land loss.

Various states have taken similar legislative steps to insure
minimum effect of state government programs on farmland
conversion. Some have enacted formal laws; others, such as Illinois,
have issued executive orders limiting activities of the executive
branch of state government that impact agricultural land.

Local government units often deal with farmland protection issues
through zoning regulations and land use planning. However, the extent
of local government's ability to influence the conversion of
agricultural land is greatly affected by the basic policy guidelines
of state government.

Several policy options are available to preserve agricultural land
within a relatively free market system, including tax incentives, farm
operation protection laws and government control of land development
rights.

Tax Incentive Programs

Currently, 46 states, including Indiana, assess farmland at its
agricultural value rather than the market value. But this alone has
not been very effective in reducing the conversion of agricultural
land. Therefore, a number of states have additional incentives,
including property tax advantages on agricultural land.

Some states require relatively long-term agreement by the
landowner that his land will be maintained in agriculture. In
return, the owner is protected from any assessments for urban
development, such as sewer systems or other public utilities, and
realizes a property tax break. In the event his land is converted to
non-agricultural use, the owner usually must pay back taxes for the
period of the agreement.

A review of tax incentive programs shows that use-value assessments
by themselves are not an effective means of preserving agricultural
lands. Programs that include contracts requiring land to remain in
agriculture work well in rural areas, but are not very useful in urban
fringe areas. In some cases, reduction of taxes can help a farmer stay
in business, but it could also have the effect of partially
subsidizing speculation if the qualifying requirements are not
selective enough.

Laws to Protect Agriculture Operations

Zoning is a police power granted by states to local government,
permitting local units to regulate the use of land. In Indiana,
"exclusive agricultural zoning" can be implemented to limit the use of
land solely to agriculture; this has been adopted in three
counties. It is important that any system for protection of
agricultural land require careful study of soil conditions and have
strong public support.

Right-to-farm legislation is another legal development that
several states, including Indiana, have adopted. Such laws are
designed to protect farmers from nuisance suits as a result of urban
encroachment. Briefly, they state that if a farming operation is not
a nuisance when it started, it can't be declared a nuisance later,
provided it has not greatly changed. This means, for example, that a
farrow-to-finish swine operation cannot be limited by subdivision
residents who have the misfortune of moving in next door.

Not all of the right-to-farm laws have been tested in court, so
some might not stand up against a determined suit. And while these
laws can better the conditions for farming operations, by themselves
they still may have only a minor impact on urban development of
agricultural land.

Government Purchase of Development Rights

Some states in the eastern U.S. have purchased the development
rights for limited tracts of farmland to provide "green belts" in the
midst of intense urban development. In an area with a relatively
large percentage of agricultural land, this is not a practical
alternative.

A major difficulty in this method of agricultural land protection
involves compensation to landowners for loss of development
rights. One attempt to provide adequate and equitable compensation is
the transfer fee system, which operates as follows:

1. A plan is developed for areas to be protected.

2. Those landowners choosing to participate in the system sign a
contract with local government agreeing to maintain their land in
agriculture.

3. When any land within the designated preservation area is
converted to a non-agricultural use, a fee is assessed to the
developer and collected by local government.

4. Periodically the funds are distributed among the landowners under
contract who have not converted their land.

WHAT HAS BEEN AND IS BEING DONE IN INDIANA TO PRESERVE PRIME LAND?

* At the state level, the General Assembly formed a temporary
legislative study committee in 1979 to investigate the prime farmland
issue. The result was a report recognizing the importance of the issue
and the need for preserving Indiana's land resources. However, no
legislation was developed.

* In the late 1970s, a Land Use Subcommittee of the Advisory
Committee on State Planning was also convened to discuss the issue of
prime agricultural land preservation. In August 1979, this group
summarized the results of its deliberation in a pamphlet entitled,
"Prime Agricultural Land Preservation in Indiana: Need, Definition
and Alternatives." Limited quantities are available from local NRCS
offices.

* Another group made up of U.S. Department of Agriculture agencies
was formed in 1980 to investigate and monitor the fate of
agricultural land.

* As mentioned earlier, NRCS and Purdue University soil scientists
have developed a map showing the distribution of prime agricultural
land on a statewide basis. This map, available in local NRCS offices as
well as from the Agricultural Experiment Station at Purdue, is useful
in identifying broad areas where urban development may conflict with
agricultural use of land. Individual county maps, now being prepared
by NRCS, are sufficiently detailed to show the extent and location of
significant tracts of prime agricultural land. Your local NRCS office
either has the map or knows when it will be completed.

* Numerous non-governmental groups and organizations have also been
studying the question of prime agricultural land. Farm groups,
including the Indiana Farm Bureau, Indiana Farmers Union, Indiana
State Grange and National Farmers Organization, have all issued policy
statements generally favoring the concept of agricultural land
protection. Copies of these statements are available from the
organizations mentioned. Various service, religious and professional
groups, such as League of Women Voters and Soil Conservation Society
of America, also have studies and position statements on the issue.

HOW MIGHT ONE GET INVOLVED OR HAVE INPUT IN LAND USE ISSUES?

In the United States, and Indiana in particular, we are truly
fortunate to have a great soils resource. It has been a major
contributing factor to a standard of living that is the envy of the
world. Future generations will undoubtedly depend on this same soils
resource for their food. What we leave them as a legacy is determined
by the land use decisions being made today--not just by government
but by individuals as well.

There are several ways to become better informed on the prime
farmland issue. Ask your local planning commission about how they are
approaching the matter. Visit the local Natural Resources Conservation Service
office to get information on the extent and location of prime farmland
in your community. The situation nationally is summarized in the
"Final Report of the National Agricultural Land Study," available in
various libraries and for purchase from the Superintendent of
Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. Numerous
articles in popular magazines are also available in local libraries.

For a more thorough discussion of the issue, what's involved and
how it might be dealt with at local and state levels, see Purdue
Extension publication EC-563, "Farmland Protection Techniques," at
your county Cooperative Extension Service office or order from CES
Publications Mailing Room, 301 South Second Street, Lafayette, IN
47905 (cost, $1.00).

All of us, by action or inaction, will participate in the decisions
made about prime farmland. The options are many, and careful study
will be needed to make reasoned decisions. We owe it to ourselves--and
our children--to become informed on this issue.

New 1/83

Cooperative Extension work in Agriculture and Home Economics, state of Indiana,
Purdue University, and U.S. Department of Agriculture Cooperating; H.A. Wadsworth,
Director, West Lafayette, IN. Issued in furtherance of the acts of May 8 and June 30,
1914. The Cooperative Extension Service of Purdue University is an affirmative
action/equal opportunity institution.